> For companies who’s entire value is the intangible human capital of their workforce, this seems like a pretty big fucking risk to take. Which are those? I'd

> For companies who’s entire value is the intangible human capital of their workforce, this seems like a pretty big fucking risk to take. Which are those? I'd say e.g. Google's value has more to do with incumbent market position. Google and others (Facebook, for instance) derive a ton of value from access to massive amounts of data and scale-required-as-table-stakes advertising revenue that make it damn near impossible to compete with them unless you're already an enormous corporation, even on some minor product that's not part of their core business. Arguably, exclusive access to and ability to leverage data is much of Amazon's value. Microsoft's, too, increasingly. Granted they need some number of competent people to keep that going in much the same way that any business does, but "entire value" is significantly overstating labor's case here, I'd say. Their historical-data moats and exclusive visibility into valuable data streams are what make them so damn hard to compete with. It'd be more accurate to say that their users are their entire value, than their human capital (though still wrong, I think).